Gary Poster wrote:

> I would think we would want to follow the pattern of the adapter_hooks in
> zope.interface.interface, including the C optimizations.

Speaking of adapter hooks: If I'm not completely mistaken, adapter hooks
know about exactly one object to be adapted. To follow the pattern of
adapter hooks in the implementation of our new lookup methods, we need
hooks that handle zero, one or more objects instead.

We could work with a second set of hooks in order to keep the existing
ones untouched, but that would require every user of the hooks feature to
implement both kinds of hooks. We could also change the signature of
adapter hooks, which would be backwards-incompatible, either with tuple
adaptation or with named adapters (since the name is the first keyword
argument for adapter hooks).

So I'd like to hear opinions: Would a backwards-incompatible change to
adapter hooks be acceptable, considering that this wouldn't be visible to
users of the component architecture but only to implementors of component
frameworks like zope.component?


Zope-Dev maillist  -
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - )

Reply via email to